IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v217y2024ics0921800923003348.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Health Status and Experienced Disutility on Air Quality Valuation

Author

Listed:
  • Bartczak, Anna M.
  • Budziński, Wiktor
  • Jusypenko, Bartosz
  • Boros, Piotr W.

Abstract

This paper examines the impact of health status, and of experienced disutility caused by air pollution, on individuals' preferences regarding the health risk reductions resulting from air quality improvement. We investigate if changes in the level of experienced disutility due to air pollution mediate the relationship between individuals' respiratory health status and their preferences regarding health risk reductions. For this purpose, we conducted a choice experiment study among inhabitants of four big Polish cities that have varying levels of particulate matter pollution. We used the modified Medical Research Council breathlessness scale, verified in clinical trials, to obtain information about respondents’ health status, except for usually applied health status measures in stated preference surveys. We do not find any direct impact of health status (apart from smoking) on willingness to pay for air quality improvement. Our results indicate, however, that individuals who self-reported a respiratory diagnosis, as well as those who scored high on the breathlessness scale, are more likely to display a latent trait indicating experienced disutility due to air pollution, and that those who experience this disutility are, in general, more in favour of air quality improvement programmes.

Suggested Citation

  • Bartczak, Anna M. & Budziński, Wiktor & Jusypenko, Bartosz & Boros, Piotr W., 2024. "The Impact of Health Status and Experienced Disutility on Air Quality Valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 217(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:217:y:2024:i:c:s0921800923003348
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2023.108071
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800923003348
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2023.108071?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Chee-Ruey Hsieh, 1998. "Health risk and the decision to quit smoking," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(6), pages 795-804.
    2. Jacquemet, Nicolas & Joule, Robert-Vincent & Luchini, Stéphane & Shogren, Jason F., 2013. "Preference elicitation under oath," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 110-132.
    3. Justyna Woźniak & Katarzyna Pactwa, 2018. "Responsible Mining—The Impact of the Mining Industry in Poland on the Quality of Atmospheric Air," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-16, April.
    4. Thiago Morello & Simone Martino & Alejandro F. Duarte & Liana Anderson & Katrina J. Davis & Sonaira Silva & Ian J. Bateman, 2019. "Fire, Tractors, and Health in the Amazon: A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Fire Policy," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 95(3), pages 409-434.
    5. Daniel Kahneman & Robert Sugden, 2005. "Experienced Utility as a Standard of Policy Evaluation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 32(1), pages 161-181, September.
    6. Alberini, Anna & Cropper, Maureen & Krupnick, Alan & Simon, N.B.Nathalie B., 2004. "Does the value of a statistical life vary with age and health status? Evidence from the US and Canada," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 769-792, July.
    7. Jones, Andrew M., 1996. "Smoking cessation and health: A response," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 755-759, December.
    8. Ami, Dominique & Aprahamian, Frédéric & Chanel, Olivier & Joulé, Robert-Vincent & Luchini, Stéphane, 2014. "Willingness to pay of committed citizens: A field experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 31-39.
    9. repec:hal:pseose:halshs-00731244 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Wiktor Budziński & Mikołaj Czajkowski, 2022. "Endogeneity and Measurement Bias of the Indicator Variables in Hybrid Choice Models: A Monte Carlo Investigation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 83(3), pages 605-629, November.
    11. María Xosé Vázquez & Jorge E. Araña & Carmelo J. León, 2006. "Economic evaluation of health effects with preference imprecision," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(4), pages 403-417, April.
    12. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Budziński, Wiktor, 2019. "Simulation error in maximum likelihood estimation of discrete choice models," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 73-85.
    13. Colombo, Sergio & Hanley, Nicholas & Tinch, Dugald, 2010. "Differences between Decision and Experienced Utility: An Investigation using the Choice Experiment method," Stirling Economics Discussion Papers 2010-13, University of Stirling, Division of Economics.
    14. Daniel McFadden & Kenneth Train, 2000. "Mixed MNL models for discrete response," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(5), pages 447-470.
    15. Vij, Akshay & Walker, Joan L., 2016. "How, when and why integrated choice and latent variable models are latently useful," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 192-217.
    16. Paul Dolan & Daniel Kahneman, 2008. "Interpretations Of Utility And Their Implications For The Valuation Of Health," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(525), pages 215-234, January.
    17. Ben-Akiva, Moshe & McFadden, Daniel & Train, Kenneth & Börsch-Supan, Axel, 2002. "Hybrid Choice Models: Progress and Challenges," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 02-29, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
    18. Mariel, Petr & Khan, Mohammad Asif & Meyerhoff, Jürgen, 2022. "Valuing individuals’ preferences for air quality improvement: Evidence from a discrete choice experiment in South Delhi," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 432-447.
    19. Alberini, Anna & Cropper, Maureen & Fu, Tsu-Tan & Krupnick, Alan & Liu, Jin-Tan & Shaw, Daigee & Harrington, Winston, 1997. "Valuing Health Effects of Air Pollution in Developing Countries: The Case of Taiwan," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 107-126, October.
    20. Laís Fajersztajn & Paulo Saldiva & Luiz Alberto Amador Pereira & Victor Figueiredo Leite & Anna Maria Buehler, 2017. "Short-term effects of fine particulate matter pollution on daily health events in Latin America: a systematic review and meta-analysis," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 62(7), pages 729-738, September.
    21. Herrera-Araujo, Daniel & Hammitt, James K. & Rheinberger, Christoph M., 2020. "Theoretical bounds on the value of improved health," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    22. Strand, Jon, 2006. "Valuation of environmental improvements in continuous time with mortality and morbidity effects," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 229-241, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bernadeta Gołębiowska & Anna Bartczak & Mikołaj Czajkowski, 2020. "Energy Demand Management and Social Norms," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-20, July.
    2. Malte Welling & Ewa Zawojska & Julian Sagebiel, 2022. "Information, Consequentiality and Credibility in Stated Preference Surveys: A Choice Experiment on Climate Adaptation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 82(1), pages 257-283, May.
    3. Ami, Dominique & Aprahamian, Frédéric & Chanel, Olivier & Joulé, Robert-Vincent & Luchini, Stéphane, 2014. "Willingness to pay of committed citizens: A field experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 31-39.
    4. Jin, Yana & Andersson, Henrik & Zhang, Shiqiu, 2020. "Do preferences to reduce health risks related to air pollution depend on illness type? Evidence from a choice experiment in Beijing, China," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    5. Faccioli, Michela & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Glenk, Klaus & Martin-Ortega, Julia, 2020. "Environmental attitudes and place identity as determinants of preferences for ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    6. Wang, Qingyi & Wang, Shenhao & Zheng, Yunhan & Lin, Hongzhou & Zhang, Xiaohu & Zhao, Jinhua & Walker, Joan, 2024. "Deep hybrid model with satellite imagery: How to combine demand modeling and computer vision for travel behavior analysis?," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    7. Biswas, Mehek & Bhat, Chandra R. & Pinjari, Abdul Rawoof, 2024. "The use of pooled RP-SP choice data to simultaneously identify alternative attributes and random coefficients on those attributes," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    8. Ching-Hua Yeh & Monika Hartmann, 2021. "To Purchase or Not to Purchase? Drivers of Consumers’ Preferences for Animal Welfare in Their Meat Choice," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-25, August.
    9. Genie, Mesfin G. & Ryan, Mandy & Krucien, Nicolas, 2021. "To pay or not to pay? Cost information processing in the valuation of publicly funded healthcare," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 276(C).
    10. Qingyi Wang & Shenhao Wang & Yunhan Zheng & Hongzhou Lin & Xiaohu Zhang & Jinhua Zhao & Joan Walker, 2023. "Deep hybrid model with satellite imagery: how to combine demand modeling and computer vision for behavior analysis?," Papers 2303.04204, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.
    11. Molloy, Joseph & Becker, Felix & Schmid, Basil & Axhausen, Kay W., 2021. "mixl: An open-source R package for estimating complex choice models on large datasets," Journal of choice modelling, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    12. Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Zagórska, Katarzyna & Letki, Natalia & Tryjanowski, Piotr & Wąs, Adam, 2021. "Drivers of farmers’ willingness to adopt extensive farming practices in a globally important bird area," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    13. Leonhard K. Lades & Liam Delaney, 2024. "Self-control failures, as judged by themselves," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, December.
    14. Boyce, Christopher & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Hanley, Nick, 2019. "Personality and economic choices," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 82-100.
    15. van Hoorn, André, 2018. "Is the happiness approach to measuring preferences valid?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 53-65.
    16. Ida, Takanori & Goto, Rei & Takahashi, Yuko & Nishimura, Shuzo, 2011. "Can economic-psychological parameters predict successful smoking cessation?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 285-295, May.
    17. Iogansen, Xiatian & Wang, Kailai & Bunch, David & Matson, Grant & Circella, Giovanni, 2023. "Deciphering the factors associated with adoption of alternative fuel vehicles in California: An investigation of latent attitudes, socio-demographics, and neighborhood effects," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    18. Johanna Lena Dahlhausen & Cam Rungie & Jutta Roosen, 2018. "Value of labeling credence attributes—common structures and individual preferences," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(6), pages 741-751, November.
    19. Gustavo García-Melero & Rubén Sainz-González & Pablo Coto-Millán & Alejandra Valencia-Vásquez, 2021. "Sustainable Mobility Policy Analysis Using Hybrid Choice Models: Is It the Right Choice?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-16, March.
    20. Nicolas Jacquemet & Alexander James & Stéphane Luchini & Jason F. Shogren, 2017. "Referenda Under Oath," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(3), pages 479-504, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:217:y:2024:i:c:s0921800923003348. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.